Question: to Party's $109ers and $215ers (Star's Turbos)

[Oluwafemi]

Daliman says the current crop of $215 players at Party are the best in the world playing Party's structure and eastbay says he's not in it to play the most skillful game so:

i notice that Stars has larger buy-in SNGs like $109s to $1050s with most of the action at the $109s and $215 Turbos. Party's 215s fill up like the smaller buy-in 6 handed SNGs on Stars ($13, 16,$36). the Turbos have a somewhat identical structure to Party's but they don't get no where near as much action. does it have something to do with the 1500 in chips vs. earn rate and having to play more skillful poker? is it the competition?

also, how can Party's players be the best in the world if they are only experts at a small stack/fast blind structure as opposed to Star's regular structure that gives you a bigger stack and allows for more skills to be applied like sound postflop play? (eastbay- spoke of Party's structure being more preflop and less complex and beatable with optimal play)

[UMTerp]

Here's a post I made a week or two ago that it pretty on point to this question, so I'm just going to copy it. It's applicable and I think it's pretty well-written. I play mostly about 75% $55 Turbos, 20% $109 Turbos, and 5% $215 Turbos. All on Stars. We all have different reasons for where we play, and I think in general, it's geared towards making the money money, which isn't necessarily the same game for each player. Here's the question I was asked, followed by my response:

-----------------------------------------------------------

[ QUOTE ]
First, I wouldn't play "turbo". What, normal single-table SNG too slow? In my opinion, the "turbo" game injects too much luck, significantly reduces strategy, and is a transparent way to churn the rake for SNGs. But that's just me, and irrelevant to the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to have to disagree about the Turbos, particularly at the lower levels. You may have a point once you get to $100 and above buy-ins, since the vast majority of the players at those levels are very competent, and it often does turn into a crapshoot. At the $50/$55 and below level, I without a doubt prefer the Turbos though, for a number of reasons (this could probably be it's own thread too):

First of all, the rake is lower, though I understand the point you were trying to make. It's 50% lower for the "10's" ($15's), 25% lower for the $20's, and 10% lower for the $50's.

I think my ROI could be slight ly higher if I played the "regular" SNGs instead of the Turbos, but as far as hourly rate, I don't think it's even close. A Turbo generally takes about 60%-70% as long as a normal one, so unless you think you could increase your ROI by 50%+ playing the regular ones, Turbo has the edge there.

And now the two main reasons:

1. I genereally 8-table the Turbo SNGs, which causes me to play a little more mechanical than optimally. Again, my ROI could be higher if I played less tables, but I'm more concerned about hourly. I can pound out 8 Turbos in about 45 minutes from start of the first one to end of the 8th one. Longer levels would force me to "play poker" a little more at the early levels, which although I'm fully capable of, it's not the highest EV for me. I'd rather just survive the first few levels of these, playing premium hands only, and letting 2 or 3 people knock themselves out in the first 15 minutes, which happens almost every tournament. Which brings me to my second (and more important IMO) consideration for playing the Turbos:

2. I believe I'm a little more mathematically-inclined than the majority of the players playing these, even at the higher levels, and once the blinds get high enough, it really is a math game. Push or fold. Players at the lower levels tend to fold way too often, and it's also not uncommon to have several players at the table limp in and fold to a raise even when the blinds are at 150-300 or 200-400. This is TERRIBLE play, and play that can easily be exploited for profit without much thinking on my part. To take a term from a thread Sklansky started a few weeks ago, I "shoot my free throws" better than the vast majority of the players in these things. And in the Turbos, I reach the point where I can use this skill to my advantage more quickly than in the regular SNGs.

I could see where a player with different strengths might prefer the longer SNGs with more play at lower blinds, but that's not for me, at least not while I'm running 8 games.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's a post I made a week or two ago that it pretty on point to this question, so I'm just going to copy it. It's applicable and I think it's pretty well-written. I play mostly about 75% $55 Turbos, 20% $109 Turbos, and 5% $215 Turbos. All on Stars. We all have different reasons for where we play, and I think in general, it's geared towards making the money money, which isn't necessarily the same game for each player. Here's the question I was asked, followed by my response:

-----------------------------------------------------------

[ QUOTE ]
First, I wouldn't play "turbo". What, normal single-table SNG too slow? In my opinion, the "turbo" game injects too much luck, significantly reduces strategy, and is a transparent way to churn the rake for SNGs. But that's just me, and irrelevant to the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to have to disagree about the Turbos, particularly at the lower levels. You may have a point once you get to $100 and above buy-ins, since the vast majority of the players at those levels are very competent, and it often does turn into a crapshoot. At the $50/$55 and below level, I without a doubt prefer the Turbos though, for a number of reasons (this could probably be it's own thread too):

First of all, the rake is lower, though I understand the point you were trying to make. It's 50% lower for the "10's" ($15's), 25% lower for the $20's, and 10% lower for the $50's.

I think my ROI could be slight ly higher if I played the "regular" SNGs instead of the Turbos, but as far as hourly rate, I don't think it's even close. A Turbo generally takes about 60%-70% as long as a normal one, so unless you think you could increase your ROI by 50%+ playing the regular ones, Turbo has the edge there.

And now the two main reasons:

1. I genereally 8-table the Turbo SNGs, which causes me to play a little more mechanical than optimally. Again, my ROI could be higher if I played less tables, but I'm more concerned about hourly. I can pound out 8 Turbos in about 45 minutes from start of the first one to end of the 8th one. Longer levels would force me to "play poker" a little more at the early levels, which although I'm fully capable of, it's not the highest EV for me. I'd rather just survive the first few levels of these, playing premium hands only, and letting 2 or 3 people knock themselves out in the first 15 minutes, which happens almost every tournament. Which brings me to my second (and more important IMO) consideration for playing the Turbos:

2. I believe I'm a little more mathematically-inclined than the majority of the players playing these, even at the higher levels, and once the blinds get high enough, it really is a math game. Push or fold. Players at the lower levels tend to fold way too often, and it's also not uncommon to have several players at the table limp in and fold to a raise even when the blinds are at 150-300 or 200-400. This is TERRIBLE play, and play that can easily be exploited for profit without much thinking on my part. To take a term from a thread Sklansky started a few weeks ago, I "shoot my free throws" better than the vast majority of the players in these things. And in the Turbos, I reach the point where I can use this skill to my advantage more quickly than in the regular SNGs.

I could see where a player with different strengths might prefer the longer SNGs with more play at lower blinds, but that's not for me, at least not while I'm running 8 games.

[/ QUOTE ]

if i'm not mistaken, i think i read this in a thread of your's about a $215 Turbo hand you played against Hassan.

[PrayingMantis]

Are you Desdia's lost brother?

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you Desdia's lost brother?

[/ QUOTE ]

no, why?

[UMTerp]

[ QUOTE ]
if i'm not mistaken, i think i read this in a thread of your's about a $215 Turbo hand you played against Hassan.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's it, but I think it answers pretty well why someone might prefer a particular structure over another even if it entails less "skillful" play. And in my opinion, it's not even "less" skillful play, just a different skill set than something traditional.

[PrayingMantis]

I'll let others elaborate.

[The Yugoslavian]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you Desdia's lost brother?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice

But where does this leave Danielh?

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if i'm not mistaken, i think i read this in a thread of your's about a $215 Turbo hand you played against Hassan.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's it, but I think it answers pretty well why someone might prefer a particular structure over another even if it entails less "skillful" play. And in my opinion, it's not even "less" skillful play, just a different skill set than something traditional.

[/ QUOTE ]

so how do you guage the competition on Stars?

Hassan
Gambler21
Mazak14
TheTakeover
slugo5
Teecoy
26.2
maurene
sheets
JohnnyBax
bigslick

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll let others elaborate.

[/ QUOTE ]

how does this in anyway have to do with this thread? does Desdia play $109 and $215 SNGs on Party? do you play $109 and $215 SNGs on Party? if so, i'd like to hear your response on the subject.

[PrayingMantis]

The subject of the differences between different SNG formats was discussed here many many times, including by myself.

As to your "how can Party's players be the best in the world" and such questions, they too were asked here many times here (usually by Desdia), sometimes in somewhat clearer and more sensible ways than here. These quesions are generally meaningless and create endless and pointless threads. I would suggest doing a search on all of Desdia's posts - I assure you most of your questions will be answered, and it's usually a very entertaining read.

[rjb03]

I don't think when he says the best in the world he means they are the best general poker players in the world. Poker has many forms as you know. I believe he's saying that playing party's structure is what the best party $215 players are best at, and the $215's on party and stars are quite a bit different and strategy may differ between the two especially in the earlier levels.

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
The subject of the differences between different SNG formats was discussed here many many times, including by myself.

As to your "how can Party's players be the best in the world" and such questions, they too were asked here many times here (usually by Desdia), sometimes in somewhat clearer and more sensible ways than here. These quesions are generally meaningless and create endless and pointless threads. I would suggest doing a search on all of Desdia's posts - I assure you most of your questions will be answered, and it's usually a very entertaining read.

[/ QUOTE ]

as far as Desdia is concerned, i'll pass on researching his posts--- you seem more interested in them than i do.

as far as my question/thread being meaningless or contributing to "endless and pointless threads", i don't see how asking a legitimate question and expecting legitimate answers (on subject) in the 1-Table Tournaments Forum has anything to do with meaningless and pointless. if anything, comments like "are you the long lost brother of Desdia" is what would make this thread meaningless and pointless. response intelligently (poker-wise) if you have something pokerwise to respond. other than that, don't contribute anymore to making this thread meaningless and pointless.

[The Yugoslavian]

[quote
as far as Desdia is concerned, i'll pass on researching his posts--- you seem more interested in them than i do.

as far as my question/thread being meaningless or contributing to "endless and pointless threads", i don't see how asking a legitimate question and expecting legitimate answers (on subject) in the 1-Table Tournaments Forum has anything to do with meaningless and pointless. if anything, comments like "are you the long lost brother of Desdia" is what would make this thread meaningless and pointless. response intelligently (poker-wise) if you have something pokerwise to respond. other than that, don't contribute anymore to making this thread meaningless and pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you *sure* you don't know Desdia?!?

Yugoslav

[Oluwafemi]

[ QUOTE ]
[quote
as far as Desdia is concerned, i'll pass on researching his posts--- you seem more interested in them than i do.

as far as my question/thread being meaningless or contributing to "endless and pointless threads", i don't see how asking a legitimate question and expecting legitimate answers (on subject) in the 1-Table Tournaments Forum has anything to do with meaningless and pointless. if anything, comments like "are you the long lost brother of Desdia" is what would make this thread meaningless and pointless. response intelligently (poker-wise) if you have something pokerwise to respond. other than that, don't contribute anymore to making this thread meaningless and pointless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you *sure* you don't know Desdia?!?

Yugoslav

[/ QUOTE ]

i know NADA of Desdia, Senor Sarejevo. however, does'nt my post flow just like too many "not understanding the edge in poker"? /images/graemlins/grin.gif